- From: Katie Haritos-Shea <ryladog@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 04:18:05 -0400
- To: Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>
- Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
- Message-ID: <CAEy-OxGyfJb=q9GUE2T+Wmx8Ok_OLm9meaoGFTcwG8EPj9XBvA@mail.gmail.com>
-1. I do NOT agree that we have consensus. Whether ir not something has been discussed before or not is not the point. Katie Haritos-Shea 703-371-5545 On Oct 12, 2016 9:54 AM, "Joshue O Connor" <josh@interaccess.ie> wrote: > Hi David, > > I think we did reach a place where the majority of the group members, at > least on the call, could live with us signaling a more regular update > cycle. > > The question is what form that would take. The balance seems to be > signalling intent to have a three year cycle, but not necessarily > committing to it. We can review our status at those times, and release > new SCs etc if we feel it is appropriate at that time. > > That seems to be the most reasonable way to work it. I'm also exercising > some faith and goodwill towards the work of the Silver team, that after 2.1 > is live, we will be well into the FPWD of Silver. > > If this is the case and the work is substantial and taking real shape then > the efforts/energy of the group will go fully behind Silver. Otherwise > maintaining a more regular dot.x release cycle is a practical alternative > to allow us to keep WCAG a vibrant relevant standard. > > Can you live with this? > > Thanks > > Josh > > Sent from TypeApp <http://www.typeapp.com/r> > > On 12 Oct 2016, at 02:59, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote: >> >> Ohhh... that's why. >> >> I'm looking at section 3.1 Normative Specifications >> >> It doesn't look like my concern was addressed, bec ause we have a >> section called "normative specifications" in which we say we will do >> "regular updates" which means we have adopted a different model from WCAG 2 >> which was was released when it was complete (rather than on a time) and had >> widespread approval. So it seems like it has been decided that we will ship >> on a schedule rather than when the spec is ready. Does that not worry >> anyone else? I was hoping we could come to consensus about whether we were >> actually going to ship on a set schedule. >> >> Cheers, >> David MacDonald >> >> >> >> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >> Tel: 613.235.4902 >> >> LinkedIn >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> >> >> twitter.com/davidmacd >> >> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> >> >> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> >> >> >> >> * Adapting the web to all users* >> * Including those with disabilities* >> >> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy >> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> >> >> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Not sure what to tell you - I just followed the link and see the >>> following: [image: image1.PNG] >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> On Oct 11, 2016, at 7:57 PM, David MacDonald < david100@sympatico.ca> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I >>> 've looked on 3 computers and I keep seeing the version >>> with the following >>> sentence >>> >>> "The Working Group intends to produce regular updates for WCAG >>> guidelines, starting with WCAG 2.1. The public schedule for the updates is >>> documented in the AG WG Project Management Plan." >>> >>> I believe the consensus changed that sentence. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> David MacDonald >>> >>> >>> >>> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >>> Tel: 613.235.4902 >>> >>> LinkedIn >>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> >>> >>> twitter.com/davidmacd >>> >>> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> >>> >>> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> >>> >>> >>> >>> * Adapting the web to all users* >>> * Including those with disabilities* >>> >>> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy >>> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 2:19 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> PS the link to the minutes seems to go to the AUG 23 meeting?? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> David MacDonald >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >>>> Tel: 613.235.4902 >>>> >>>> LinkedIn >>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> >>>> >>>> twitter.com/davidmacd >>>> >>>> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> >>>> >>>> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> * Adapting the web to all users* >>>> * Including those with disabilities* >>>> >>>> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy >>>> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 2:13 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> This seems to be the same document that we had going into the >>>>> call... >>>>> >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2016/09/draft-wcag-charter >>>>> >>>>> is there a version with the amended text that we came to consensus to, >>>>> on the call. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> David MacDonald >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >>>>> Tel: 613.235.4902 >>>>> >>>>> LinkedIn >>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> >>>>> >>>>> twitter.com/davidmacd >>>>> >>>>> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> >>>>> >>>>> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> * Adapting the web to all users* >>>>> * Including those with disabilities* >>>>> >>>>> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy >>>>> policy <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < >>>>> akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> CALL FOR CONSENSUS – ends Thursday October 13 at 1:00pm Boston time. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is a CfC seeking WG approval to release the current draft >>>>>> charter for AC review. The item was surveyed, discussed on the WG >>>>>> call, and approved ( http://www.w3.org/2016/10/11-w >>>>>> ai-wcag-minutes.html >>>>>> <http://www.w3.org/2016/08/23-wai-wcag-minutes.html#item03> ). There >>>>>> was much discussion leading up to the call, and on the call, and the group >>>>>> felt that a consensus opinion was reached on key items. >>>>>> >>>>>> Draft charter: http://www.w3.org/2016/09/draft-wcag-charter >>>>>> >>>>>> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have >>>>>> not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not >>>>>> being able to live with” this position, please let the group know before >>>>>> the CfC deadline. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> AWK >>>>>> >>>>>> Andrew Kirkpatrick >>>>>> Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility >>>>>> Adobe >>>>>> >>>>>> akirkpat@adobe.com >>>>>> http://twitter.com/awkawk >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2016 08:18:38 UTC